Methods, systems, and computer program products for obtaining best execution of orders to buy or sell a financial instrument for which a net asset value is periodically calculated

ABSTRACT

The present invention uses new order entry types (formats) and new order management methods to meet the order and transaction management needs of investors, traders, brokers, market makers and service providers for institutional traders for transactions in NAV Instruments by integrating the implementation of trades when conventional markets and NAV-based trading markets operate contemporaneously. Among other features, the invention provides methods and computer systems for determining the appropriate nature, size, sequence and latency of orders to be entered into alternative trading venues to improve executions.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application claims priority to U.S. Provisional ApplicationNo. 61/045,683 filed on Apr. 17, 2008 and is a continuation-in-part ofpending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/056,958, filed on Mar. 27,2008, and is also a continuation-in-part of pending U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 12/056,980, filed on Mar. 27, 2008, both of whichare continuations-in-part of U.S. Pat. No. 7,496,531, filed on Mar. 7,2007, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Pat. No. 7,444,300, filedon May 31, 2005, all of which are incorporated herein by reference intheir entireties.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The invention relates generally to financial services, and, inparticular, to management of order entry and execution in tradingfinancial instruments for which a net asset value is periodicallycalculated.

2. Background Art

One of the most significant developments in trading of equity andequity-like financial instruments in the United States has been therapid growth of trading volume in financial instruments for which a netasset value (NAV) is periodically calculated (NAV Instruments). Foremostamong these NAV Instruments have been exchange traded funds (ETFs), atype of portfolio investment product first introduced in the U.S. marketin 1993 that has enjoyed a high rate of growth in assets and tradingvolume almost since its introduction.

To illustrate the growth of trading in ETFs, 2006 trading volume wasapproximately 100 billion ETF shares in the United States. This volumewas equal to the trading volume for all equity instruments traded on theNew York Stock Exchange just ten years earlier, in 1996. In 2007, ETFvolume was about 177 billion shares and, in the first quarter of 2008,average daily ETF volume exceeded one billion shares, suggesting annualETF trading volume might exceed 250 billion shares for 2008.

As with other classes of securities, the trading volumes for NAVInstruments vary greatly from the least active to the most activelytraded securities. Using early 2008 trading data, ETFs that trade morethen 1 million shares per day account for about 95% of ETF tradingvolume. These are predominantly large funds but their trading volume isgreatly disproportionate to their assets. To illustrate howdisproportionate the volume is in the most actively traded ETFs, ETFstrading a million shares per day or more have assets of about $4.7billion on average. ETFs trading less than a million shares per day haveaverage assets of about $470 million per fund. While the assets of themost actively traded funds exceed the assets of the typical lessactively traded fund by a factor of approximately 10, the averagetrading volume of funds trading more then a million shares per day ismore than 12.5 million shares per day whereas the average trading volumeof the less actively traded funds is less than 120,000 shares per day.The trading volume of the more actively traded funds exceeds the tradingvolume of the less actively traded funds by more than 100 times. Theprincipal reason for the greater trading volume in the most activelytraded ETFs is grounded in the history of trading financial instrumentsbased on the indexes used for these actively traded ETFs.

The ETF was designed to provide something to trade on the floor of theToronto

Stock Exchange in Canada and the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) in theUnited States. History suggested to the AMEX product designers thatpopular indexes would be the best patterns or templates for activelytraded ETF products. By the time the S&P 500 SPDR was introduced in1993, it was well established that there was considerable interest inS&P 500 portfolio trading and in options and futures contracts on theStandard & Poor's 500. There was also substantial trading volume inother S&P and Russell index derivatives and index portfolio baskets and,eventually, in derivative products based on major Dow Jones, MSCI,Nasdaq and FTSE indexes. The introduction of additional index ETFs since1993 and the continued emphasis on intraday ETF trading, particularly incompetition and conjunction with active trading in futures and optioncontracts and other instruments based on benchmark indexes has lead to acontinuation of the focus of active ETF trading on a relatively smallnumber of ETFs based on popular benchmark indexes.

Today ETFs have moved far beyond the initial objective of trading anindex portfolio product that led to their introduction in 1993. Themutual fund market timing and late trading scandals of 2003 and 2004drew new attention to important characteristics of ETFs that were, insome respects, serendipitous features of their creation a decadeearlier. One serendipitous feature was that, in contrast to mutual fundswhere investors entering and leaving the mutual fund enter and leave atnet asset value with the cost of their entry and exit borne by all theshareholders in the fund, ongoing shareholders of most ETFs areprotected from the costs of other investors' trading. Apart from ongoingshareholder protection from the costs of fund share trading, there areother advantages of ETFs over conventional mutual funds. Most of theseadvantages also appeal to long-term investors rather than to short-termtraders. Probably the most important of the other ETF advantages is taxefficiency. In most ETFs, an investor need not pay taxes on capitalgains until she sells the fund shares. In addition, the conflict ofinterest between taxable and tax exempt investors that often createsproblems for mutual fund portfolio managers is resolved by the ETFstructure.

In the context of investment applications, what is needed to furtherdevelopment of the ETF marketplace is a second trading mechanism thatmeets the needs of investors even if it does not generate as muchtrading activity as the current trading mechanism.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The supplementary ETF trading mechanism which promises to become thedominant trading mechanism for less actively traded index ETFs and forvirtually all actively managed ETFs is a mechanism that providessecondary market NAV-based trading contingent on the closing net assetvalue of a fund. One of the most important features of having NAV-basedsecondary market trading alongside conventional intraday trading of ETFsis that the two markets will interact. Market makers who operate in bothmarkets will manage the risk of their positions by trading in theNAV-based market to reduce or increase their position to get to adesired level of exposure to the fund. The present invention consists ofmethods and related computer systems that use published and proprietaryvaluation systems and available bids and offers in related markets toprovide improved executions in NAV Instruments.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated herein and form a partof the specification, illustrate one or more embodiments of the presentinvention and, together with the description, further serve to explainthe principles of the invention and to enable a person skilled in thepertinent art to make and use the invention.

FIG. 1 is a flow diagram that illustrates how assets move into and outof a conventional mutual fund as cash investments and cash redemptionpayments which are priced at the fund's net asset value on the day thefund investment is made or redeemed.

FIG. 2 is a flow diagram that shows how in-kind purchases andredemptions of exchange traded fund (ETF) shares are made at net assetvalue and how the cost of trading in the securities delivered in acreation or securities received in a redemption are borne by theinvestors who are moving assets into and out of the fund.

FIG. 3A shows the relationship of bids and offers for ETF shares in theconventional ETF market, illustrating a typical relationship of thebid/offer spread to the published intraday NAV proxy.

FIG. 3B shows bids and offers in an NAV-based market with a bid/offerschedule centered on the 4:00 pm net asset value which is the basis forbids, offers and executions in this market in pennies ($0.01), inaccordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 4 illustrates some characteristics of market maker risk managementusing the invention when side-by-side trading in a conventional ETFmarket and in an NAV-based market are available, in accordance with anembodiment of the present invention. Use of the related marketsincreases a market maker's flexibility and reduces the costs of positionmanagement. As will be seen, availability of the related markets alsoreduces trading spreads for most investors and increases trading volumein general.

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram that depicts exemplary processes in which aspecialized NAV Instrument order management and execution system acceptsorders in traditional formats and in new formats from a portfoliomanagement process, assembles data from a variety of markets and marketrelated sources, processes the orders and delivers them for executionwith reporting and feedback, in accordance with an embodiment of thepresent invention.

FIG. 6 is a flow diagram that depicts exemplary order managementprocesses by which a financial intermediary such as a broker-dealer,bank or market maker receives, analyses and cancels or transmits forexecution an order that could be executed on either a conventionalsecondary market or a net asset value based market, in accordance withan embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a flow diagram that depicts exemplary order managementprocesses by which a specialized computer system receives, translatesinto computer language and transmits for execution a traditionallanguage expression of trading instructions for an order that could beexecuted on either a conventional secondary market or a net asset valuebased market, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 8 is a flow diagram that depicts exemplary order managementprocesses by which a specialized computer system receives, calculatesorder terms, formats and transmits for execution an order that could beexecuted on either a conventional secondary market or a net asset valuebased market, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 9 is a flow diagram that depicts exemplary risk and order bookmanagement systems of a market maker that maintains markets inconventional secondary markets or net asset value based markets ininstruments for which a net asset value is periodically calculated, inaccordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 10 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer connected to anetwork upon which the exemplary methods and systems of the presentinvention may be implemented.

The features and advantages of the present invention will become moreapparent from the detailed description set forth below when taken inconjunction with the drawings.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

This specification discloses one or more embodiments that incorporatethe features of this invention. The disclosed embodiment(s) merelyexemplify the invention. The scope of the invention is not limited tothe disclosed embodiment(s). The invention is defined by the claimsappended hereto.

The embodiment(s) described, and references in the specification to “oneembodiment”, “an embodiment”, “an example embodiment”, etc., indicatethat the embodiment(s) described can include a particular feature,structure, or characteristic, but every embodiment cannot necessarilyinclude the particular feature, structure, or characteristic. Moreover,such phrases are not necessarily referring to the same embodiment.Further, when a particular feature, structure, or characteristic isdescribed in connection with an embodiment, it is understood that it iswithin the knowledge of one skilled in the art to effect such feature,structure, or characteristic in connection with other embodimentswhether or not explicitly described.

An embodiment consists of major and subsidiary components implementedthrough a variety of separate and related computer systems. Thesecomponents may be used either individually or in a variety ofcombinations to achieve the objectives of providing improved executionsof NAV Instruments traded contemporaneously in conventional markets andNAV-based markets. The opportunities to integrate the systems covered bythe present invention with the methodologies and computer relatedsystems of U.S. Pat. No. 7,496,531, which is incorporated herein byreference in its entirety, will enable a person skilled in the pertinentart to make and use these inventions together.

I. FEATURES OF EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION

The following features comprise some of the features of one or moreembodiments of the invention, and are presented by way of example, andnot limitation:

Execute orders in an NAV Instrument on either an NAV-based market or aconventional market using one or more order entry formats to deliverorders to one or more proprietary algorithms that evaluate theimportance of, among other things, one or more of (i) the relationshipsbetween and among bids, offers, and intraday NAV proxies; (ii) tradingvolumes, bids, offers and reported transaction prices for NAVInstruments and their underlying constituents; (iii) trading volumes inNAV-based and conventional markets; (iv) recent market volatility anddirection; (v) estimates of market depth; and (vi) costs to create orredeem shares or units in an open-end NAV Instrument.

Use price prediction technology to achieve best execution acrosstraditional NAV Instrument markets and NAV-based markets.

Analyze intraday bids and offers in both traditional NAV Instrumentmarkets and NAV-based markets and intraday value information from publicand proprietary sources to predict price changes over periods as long asthe remainder of the trading session and to manage bids and offers inboth markets.

Manage NAV-based contingent orders, executions, and trade reporting toavoid disclosure of information not required by regulators.

Integrate the NAV-based order handling system of patent application Ser.No. 12/056,958 with the order book of an electronic communicationsnetwork (ECN) that holds undisclosed orders to improve executions in NAVInstruments.

Preference NAV Instrument orders delivered to or by an ECN to improveexecution prices of those orders when they reduce imbalances on ordersentered from other sources.

Preference orders at or around NAV that offset an imbalance of orders onthe other side of the market by compensating providers of imbalancereducing orders for providing liquidity.

II. EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS

One of the important features of exchange traded funds, the most widelyused and actively traded of the NAV Instruments discussed herein, is thedifference in the way these funds accommodate transactions with theirshareholders compared to the way mutual funds accommodate shareholdertransactions. FIG. 1 is a diagram 100 illustrating how transactionsoccur in the purchase and sale by investors of mutual fund shares. Bypricing all transactions in the mutual fund's shares “at the net assetvalue next determined,” the fund 104 provides free liquidity toinvestors entering 102 and leaving 106 the fund. As FIG. 1 shows, anyonepurchasing mutual fund shares for cash 108 gets a share 110 of thesecurities positions already held by the fund, priced at net assetvalue. The new investor in a no-load mutual fund typically pays notransaction costs to buy shares. Furthermore, all the non-transactingshareholders of the fund share the transaction costs associated withinvesting the new investor's cash in portfolio securities. Transactioncosts are defined as:

-   -   The cost of buying or selling a financial instrument measured in        the context of its impact on the portfolio, including, at a        minimum, any purchase or sale commission charged by the        brokerage firm executing the trade and part of the spread        between the bid and the asked prices. More sophisticated        transaction cost measurement systems add the market impact of        large trades and the opportunity cost of unexecuted trades. The        most useful measurements of transaction costs include        commissions and fees, market makers' spreads, and opportunity        costs associated with not transacting when a trade is not        executed. (Dictionary of Financial Risk Management, 1996, p.        285).

Similarly, when an investor departs 106 the mutual fund, that investorreceives cash 112 equal to the net asset value of the shares 114 whenthe NAV is next calculated. All the shareholders in the fund bear thecost of selling portfolio securities to provide this liquidity. To theentering or leaving shareholder, liquidity is essentially free. To theongoing shareholders of the fund, the liquidity given transactingshareholders is costly. The cost of providing this free liquidity toentering and leaving shareholders is a perennial drag on a mutual fund'sperformance. Edelen, Roger M., Richard Evans and Gregory B. Kadlec,“Scale Effects in Mutual Fund Performance: The Role of Trading Costs”Unpublished working paper (2007), p. 26 and Table V (An electronic copyof this paper is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=951367) foundthat the average cost of providing this liquidity in a large sample ofmutual funds was 0.75% of fund assets per year.

FIG. 2 is a diagram 200 illustrating that exchange-traded funds workdifferently than mutual funds. For exchange-traded funds, creations andredemptions of ETF shares are typically made in-kind. Baskets ofportfolio securities 202 are deposited 208 with the fund 204 in exchangefor fund shares 210 in a creation. In a redemption, fund shares areturned in 214 to the fund 204 in exchange 212 for a basket of portfoliosecurities 206. Small cash balancing amounts (CBA) are used to equalizethe values exchanged. The creating or redeeming investor—often, a marketmaker in the ETF shares—is responsible for the costs of investing in theportfolio securities for deposit and for the costs of disposing ofportfolio securities received in the redemption of fund shares. Themarket maker expects to pass these transaction costs on to investors andtraders when he trades fund shares in the secondary market on theexchange. The cost of entering and leaving a fund varies, depending onthe level of fund share trading activity and the nature of thesecurities in the fund's portfolio. For example, on the latter point,the cost of trading in small-cap stocks can be much greater than thecost of trading in large-cap stocks.

ETFs are different from mutual funds in the way they accommodateshareholder entry and exit in at least two ways. As depicted in FIG. 2,the transaction costs associated with ETF shareholder entry and exit areultimately borne by the entering and exiting investors, not by the fund.Furthermore, unlike a mutual fund, an exchange-traded fund does not haveto hold cash balances to provide for cash redemptions. An ETF can stayfully invested at all times. As a result of these differences, theperformance experienced by ongoing shareholders in an ETF should, overtime, handily surpass the performance experienced by ongoingshareholders of a conventional mutual fund using an identical investmentprocess. Moreover, even though the exchange-traded fund was designed tobe traded throughout the trading day on an exchange, the ETF is a muchbetter product than a conventional fund for the shareholder who does notwant to trade in and out of the fund, preferring to hold a position inthe fund shares indefinitely. As experienced mutual fund market timersknow, a mutual fund is a better product to trade than an ETF because themutual fund pays the timer's trading costs.

The conventional mutual fund structure that provides free liquidity tofund share traders was the breeding ground for the problems of latetrading and market timing which provoked the mutual fund scandals of2003 and 2004. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has spent agreat deal of time and effort trying to deal with the problem of markettiming trades in mutual funds without eliminating the free liquiditywhich ongoing shareholders in mutual funds give entering and leavingshareholders. A variety of operational “patches” have been made by somefund companies as they attempt to restrict market timing trades. Inconnection with Rule 22c-2, the SEC implemented a complex and costlyreporting structure with nearly mandatory redemption fees on mutual fundpurchases that are closed out within a week. In the final analysis, theelimination of free liquidity—most easily through the exchange-tradedfund in-kind creation and redemption process—is the only way toeliminate market timing without imposing unnecessary costs on all fundinvestors. Even if there will be no such thing as a market timer in thefuture, long-term investors will fare better in funds that protect themfrom the costs of other investors entering and leaving the fund.

To facilitate intraday trading in ETFs, the SEC has requireddissemination of intraday calculations of the value of index ETFportfolios. Although intraday index values for the S&P 500 had beenavailable for some time before the introduction of the SPDR (the firstU.S. ETF that held an S&P 500 index portfolio), the introduction of ETFsled to the public dissemination of intraday values for the indexportfolios underlying ETFs every 15 seconds throughout the trading day.

The ETF market has evolved substantially since the introduction of thefirst ETFs based on benchmark indexes. Most of the recently introducedindex ETFs track less familiar and less popular indexes than the S&P500, the Dow Industrials, the NASDAQ 100 and the Russell 2000. There arenot as many derivatives on or as extensive trading of baskets based onthe newer indexes. The absence of intraday trading in other productsbased on these indexes has made the intraday liquidity of the newer ETFsless reliable than the liquidity in more actively traded ETFs ifinvestors want to make sizable transactions in the intraday market.

As ETF offerings move to special purpose indexes and, more importantly,to actively managed ETFs, there will be less interest in derivatives andin active trading of the ETF shares and more emphasis on the investmentmerits and basic liquidity of the ETF's shares. When non-transparentactively managed ETFs are introduced, it will not be appropriate toprovide intraday valuations every 15 seconds on the portfolios of thesefunds. Such frequent valuations would compromise the confidentiality ofthe fund's investment process. Without transparent portfolios, intradaytrading will inevitably be less active on these actively managed fundsthan on most popular index ETFs.

III. NET ASSET VALUE BASED SECONDARY MARKET TRADING FOR EXCHANGE TRADEDFUNDS

The objectives and interests of investors and traders who use the morerecently issued ETFs, particularly the first limited function activelymanaged ETFs, will be more oriented toward investment than trading. Withless frequent dissemination of intraday values and less scope forintraday arbitrage trading, the motivation that led to the introductionof ETFs as something to trade is switching to the development ofsomething that provides better value to investors than conventionalmutual funds because it protects ongoing shareholders from the cost ofother investors moving into and out of the fund.

A daily net asset value for both mutual funds and ETFs is typicallydetermined by prices or bids and offers for portfolio holdingsprevailing at 4:00 pm in U.S. markets. Not surprisingly, thenet-asset-value-based trading mechanism for NAV Instruments issuperficially similar to the net-asset-value-based pricing of mutualfunds. While the ETFs will not provide free liquidity to entering anddeparting fund shareholders as the mutual funds do, ETF investors willbe able to trade throughout the day at a price that is contingent on thefund's 4:00 pm net asset value calculation. The execution price is froma set of prices that are specified relative to a net asset valuecalculation. That set of prices will comprise (a) a first price that isat a specified discount to the net asset value; (b) a second price thatis equal to the net asset value; and (c) a third price that is at aspecified premium to the net asset value. This secondary marketNAV-based trading is an efficient trading mechanism that all investorswill consider fair. The need for NAV-based secondary market trading forETFs and other NAV Instruments stems from several facts:

There are differences in the applications traders and investors find forbenchmark index ETFs versus custom index and actively managed ETFs wherethe investment motive dominates the trading requirement.

NAV-based trading will become increasingly important for all ETFsbecause the nature of the ETF as a portfolio product with portfoliopricing (i.e. pricing of the portfolio, not pricing in the market forthe ETF share itself) means that there will inevitably be greater focuson net asset value as ETFs and mutual funds become more interchangeablein investors' minds and portfolios.

Trades executed relative to an ETF's closing net asset value provide theclearest measure for all investors of their fund share trading costs.Trading costs in the intraday ETF market are much more difficult for atypical investor to measure accurately.

This last point is particularly important. The availability of an NAVproxy value every 15 seconds for today's ETFs does not mean that theinvestor can trade at or relative to that NAV proxy value. Trading inthe ETF market now takes place as it does in the stock market—in termsof bids and offers entered in dollars and cents, not relative to a netasset value proxy. Most ETF investors do not see the intraday proxyvalues disseminated for today's ETFs and many investors are not evenaware of the existence of these proxy values. Only in the NAV-basedmarket where the closing net asset value is the basis for trading is anynet asset value calculation relevant to the pricing of a specific trade.By trading relative to the closing net asset value every investor candetermine, in advance, her cost of trading relative to the closing netasset value of the ETF. It is then a matter of comparing the tradingcosts of a benchmark index ETF to the trading costs of actively managedETFs—and to measure executions relative to the net asset value of thefund. Because there will continue to be active intraday trading in manybenchmark index ETFs, the spread in NAV-based trading is likely to betighter in these ETFs than the spread in the NAV-based market in lessactively traded ETFs. However, it will be a relatively straightforwardprocess to compare trading costs between and among all ETFs in theNAV-based market.

FIG. 3A is a graph 300 designed to show, by way of a schematic, thepricing relationships that typically prevail in the intraday trading ofNAV-based instruments. The relevant prices are the market price of theETF shown here on the vertical axis 302 and the market price of theportfolio shown here on the horizontal axis 304. Theoretically, the NAVproxy (the 45° line) 306 should be the center point around whichintraday trading occurs. As the close up inside the circle illustrates,at any given time the bid 308 and offer 310 from a market maker willtypically find either the bid 308 or offer 310 side on or very close tothe NAV proxy parity line 306. The other side of the market will beeither significantly above or significantly below the parity line 306.This placement of the bid 308 and offer 310 relative to the intraday NAVproxy 306 reflects the fact that most intraday trading in theconventional ETF market is intermediated, that is, a market maker is onone side of the trade. Public orders tend to be predominantly on eitherthe buy side or the sell side at any given moment. Executions very closeto net asset value are not common except in the most actively tradedETFs where the bid asked spread may be as small as $0.01 per share. Incontrast to the NAV-based market, an investor cannot enter an order forexecution relative to the NAV proxy in the traditional market.

FIG. 3B is a tabular representation 312 showing a hypothetical scheduleof bids and offers in the NAV-based market. In this case there is onlyone relevant value that serves as the base for trading. That value isthe net asset value 314 to be calculated from prices of the NAVInstrument's portfolio as of the end of the trading day. Bids and offerscan be entered at or relative to the net asset value. There is a bid for1,000 shares 316 at net asset value reflected in FIG. 3B. The other bids318 are below and all the offers 320 are above the yet to be determined4:00 pm net asset value. The large bids and offerings of 100,000 sharesshown 3 cents below and 3 cents above NAV illustrate the availability oflarge volumes through the ETF share creation/redemption mechanism. Inone embodiment of the invention an algorithm will direct orders to themost favorable market, for example, a large sell order will typically besent to the bid in the intraday market illustrated in FIG. 3A and a buyorder to the relatively more favorable offer in the NAV-based market inFIG. 3B. In another embodiment, long latency (resting) orders in theNAV-based market will provide a high degree of liquidity fortransactions of significant size. Long latency orders to buy just belowand to sell just above a specified NAV calculation entered by marketmakers and other market participants in furtherance of their tradingobjectives will provide more liquidity in the NAV based secondary marketthan is likely to be available in the conventional intraday market,except for the most actively traded benchmark index ETFs.

IV. NEW ORDER FORMATS

The availability of more than one market (one or more each ofconventional and NAV-based markets) and more than one meaning that maybe attached to such terms as “limit” and “market not held”, amongothers, make it necessary to devise new order formats (order types) andto define commonly used order format terms more precisely to preventmisunderstandings and trading errors. For example, in one implementationof the present invention, an order entered as “market not held” or withsome other presently used or newly designated extension or othercharacterization may grant discretion to the party charged withexecuting the trade to select the best conventional or best NAV-basedmarket and execute the order in that market (or a combination ofmarkets) immediately, over the course of a trading session or not atall. The choice of market and the format for ultimate order entry onthat market may be based on the discretionary judgment of the partyhandling the order or on an algorithm utilized by that party or aservice provider or on other methods apparent to one skilled in the artwithout departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention.

Another embodiment of the present invention addresses the interactionbetween the current intraday trading markets in NAV Instruments andmarkets where NAV Instruments are traded for settlement at or relativeto a specified net asset value from the perspective of a market maker.Looking at the market maker's trading objective in both the conventionaland in the NAV-based market, the objective in each case might bedescribed as trying to sell ETF shares above a measure of net assetvalue and buy ETF shares below that measure of net asset value. Thissame objective applies in both the intraday market and in the NAV-basedmarket, even though the appropriate NAV or NAV proxy in the two marketswill be different. Through their common focus on the NAV of theunderlying portfolio, the two markets are related and trading in the twomarkets is integrated.

The relationship of the two markets and their joint role in improvingthe methods market makers will use to manage their positions and reducetheir cost of hedging, especially in the trading of actively managed andother NAV-based instruments with non-transparent portfolios, isillustrated in chart 400 of FIG. 4. Portfolio transparency imposes costson the shareholders of all index funds that shareholders ofnon-transparent funds can avoid. (See Gastineau, Gary L. “The Cost ofTrading Transparency: What We Know, What We Don't Know and How We WillKnow,” The Journal of Portfolio Management, Fall, 2008, pp. 72-81.)Transparency in ETF portfolios reduces the trading cost of ETF shares,but increases the trading costs within ETF portfolios. The presentinvention facilitates the reduction of costs borne by the ongoingshareholders of a fund, consistent with the ETF principle of imposingthe costs of entry into and exit from the fund on entering and exitinginvestors as illustrated in FIG. 2. FIG. 4 helps illustrate how theinteraction of the market maker's bids and offers with its positionmanagement can reduce the market maker's costs and risks, facilitatingtighter spreads and higher trading volume (greater liquidity) in both aconventional market 402 and an NAV-based market 404. The availability ofthe two related markets generally means that market maker inventorypositions can be smaller than before end-of-day NAV-based trading wasintroduced. A smaller position generally carries less inventory risk forthe market maker. If a market maker is providing seed capital for anewly issued ETF, its inventory might be larger than would be strictlynecessary to support a trading book, but the market maker's willingnessto make a tight market around the fund's daily NAV should reduce theneed for seeding new funds with more than a few million dollars ofcapital. In this embodiment of the invention, any position a marketmaker might take, long or short, in intraday trading can be adjusted bytrading in the end-of-day NAV-based market.

While the discussion herein emphasizes trading relative to the end ofday NAV, it is important to note that other embodiments of the NAV-basedmarket would use an NAV calculation from opening, hourly or otherprices, including the end-of-day NAV from a future day. The latterapplication is discussed below and will be particularly important in NAVinstruments based on portfolios consisting of securities and otherfinancial instruments trading in primary markets that have differenttrading hours than U.S. markets.

One expected consequence of the linkage of the two related markets isthat trading spreads will be tighter in both markets then they wouldhave been with the intraday market operating alone. Other probableconsequences of this embodiment are that creation and redemptionactivity will be more frequent, individual creation and redemptiontransactions will generally be smaller, and creation and redemptionactivity will have lower market impact. Correspondingly, the totaltrading volume in the two related ETF share markets will be greater. Auniversal experience in the history of trading has been that as spreadshave narrowed, volumes have increased much more than proportionally.Anyone who doubts this need only compare trading spreads and tradingvolumes over the past 40 years in any major financial market. Althoughthere have been other contributing factors, the dominant cause oftoday's high trading volumes is lower trading costs.

The lower trading costs stemming from NAV-based trading should helpoffset some of the problems attributed to today's electronic markets.The increased trading volumes and tighter bid-asked spreadscharacteristic of highly automated electronic markets have had a numberof effects on the ability of market makers to provide liquidity and onthe ability of newly launched ETFs to compete with established benchmarkindex ETFs. Specifically, traditional exchange floors with Specialistsand other market makers charged with making orderly markets insecurities are disappearing and being replaced by all-electronicmarkets. Requirements that orders be routed to the market with the bestbid or offer on the other side of the market reduce the margin a marketmaker can earn in an active market. Correspondingly, the increasingconcentration of trading volume in the most actively traded shares leadsto wider relative spreads and lower relative trading volume in lessactively traded instruments. The Applicants believe that theavailability of both traditional intraday trading and NAV-based tradingin ETFs will increase the total trading volume—especially in lessactively traded ETFs, reduce market maker costs and risks, and increasethe ability of exchanges to provide an incentive structure that willencourage the development of new ETFs that offer better value toinvestors than ETFs that track popular benchmark indexes.

For all NAV Instruments, NAV-based secondary markets are inevitablylinked to traditional intraday trading. Investors, brokers and marketmakers handling or interacting with orders in either of these marketswill consider and evaluate a number of variables in different ways whenthey consider which market to use for a specific order and how to handlethat order. For example, the existing intraday evaluation standard forindex ETFs is dissemination of an intraday NAV proxy every 15 secondsthroughout the trading day. Some NAV Instruments do not and will notoffer this specific intraday proxy valuation. For example, subject toSEC exemptive relief, actively managed ETFs with non-transparentportfolios will not publish share valuations at 15 second intervals.Implementations of the invention will direct orders to one market oranother and to one of two or more similar products to improve executionsbased on the available information on fund values and bid-asked spreads.

Apart from differences in the availability of periodic intraday values,there are significant differences of opinion as to appropriate ways tocalculate and use intraday ETF net asset value proxies. The principalprovider of publicly available NAV proxies is the National SecuritiesClearing Corporation (NSCC). Most market makers in NAV Instrumentsarrange for calculation of proprietary NAV proxies which differ in theirinputs or outputs in one or more ways from those disseminated by theNSCC. Market makers in ETFs like to develop supplementary informationand add nuances aimed at determining the direction and likelihood of anychanges in the value of an NAV Instrument. In one embodiment of theinvention, brokers and market makers will use proprietary valuationsystems in an attempt to improve their handling and pricing of ETForders and executions. Many fund customers—especially definedcontribution accounts and investment advisors experienced in usingmutual funds—are accustomed to the type of NAV pricing offered by mutualfunds. The NAV-based secondary market in NAV Instruments delivers pricesat or relative to the net asset value calculated at the market closethat parallel this familiar mutual fund structure. A market maker canmanage his position more effectively by operating simultaneously in bothconventional intraday and closing NAV-based markets, increasing hisprofit and trading volume while reducing his risk.

Under one interpretation of Regulation NMS (seehttp://www.sec.gov/rules/final/34-51808.pdf) a contingent trade (e.g., atrade priced relative to a net asset value calculation that will be madesometime after the execution of the contingent trade) is exempt from theNMS trade-through rules which markets must observe for orders enteredfor traditional execution. In an embodiment of the present invention,when a broker, market maker, or ECN holds orders exempt from one or moreNMS requirements, the undisclosed orders can interact with disclosed andother undisclosed orders in a variety of ways to improve the executionof both orders. In another embodiment, new order types or contingenciesmay be offered. NAV contingent orders may be executed against displayedand un-displayed orders using low latency order entry techniques andorder management algorithms developed by market participants or theirservice providers. In another embodiment, algorithms will consider therelationships of current disclosed and undisclosed bids and offers inthe conventional intraday market and in the NAV-based secondary marketand other information developed to improve executions. An example ofsuch other information is a predicted change in an intraday NAV proxycalculated by the NSCC or by another party. In one embodiment, thetrading focus may center on predicting the NAV at the end of the day.Newly arriving orders that interact with standing orders in either thetraditional market (fully subject to NMS) or in the NAV-based market canbe managed by algorithmic models. In another embodiment, a number oforder management processes and algorithms can be used to analyze thenature and probe the depth of the liquidity in the two related markets.An ECN specializing in undisclosed NAV-based orders will offer a usefulliquidity pool for NAV Instrument transactions.

V. EXECUTING TRADES

The best way to execute a trade may be very different for the mostactively traded index ETFs and the less actively traded index ornon-transparent (full-featured actively managed) ETFs. Today, BestExecution is defined as, “a trading process Firms apply that seeks tomaximize the value of a client portfolio within each client's statedinvestment objectives and constraints.” CFA Institute Trade ManagementGuidelines, www.cfainstitute.org. Recent volatility of themarket—measured in the current trading session and in recentsessions—has important implications for order management. The best wayto meet trading and pricing obligations will depend on the presence orabsence of various kinds of information from the two markets. Forexample, limited trading activity and modest order flow will notnecessarily lead to high trading risk in the contingent NAV-basedmarket. The focus on a future NAV will make trading costs much easier tocontrol than in the conventional intraday ETF market. If intradayinformation is limited, as it will be for less transparent ETFs,NAV-based trading will be preferred.

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram illustrating an automated process forNAV-Instrument order management and execution. While elements or theentire system can be used by a variety of individuals and institutionsto implement NAV Instrument trades after evaluation of a wide range ofvariables that affect optimum order entry and execution over severalmarkets and a number of distinct NAV Instruments, the system 500, asdepicted in FIG. 5 is likely to be used by an investment advisor who isresponsible for the investment of the assets of individuals or smallinstitutions in NAV Instruments. There is no reason, however, why anindividual investor, a major institution or any other investor orinvestment manager could not use the system. The NAV Instrument ordermanagement and execution system 500 consists of a number of processeswhich perform a variety of functions and which interact to translate theinitial portfolio management order description into executable orders inelectronic trading venues, using inputs from a variety of specializedanalytical modules.

The portfolio management order description 502 might be entered on aform designed to capture the objectives of the entity placing theorder—including; for example, measures of the urgency with which theexecution is to be pursued or instructions on how to compareconventional market and NAV based market alternatives. A trainedportfolio manager might enter the order in standard English sentencesand the system would parse the order into specific instructions.Alternatively, a less experienced user of the system might fill out aform online to provide similar information on the way the order is to beexecuted.

The descriptive order entry is delivered to the intelligent tradingalgorithmic execution processor 504 for analysis using inputs from anumber of sources, four of which are illustrated in FIG. 5. The fourtrading support modules are a price prediction module 506, a volatilityand market risk measurement module 508, an alternative market evaluationmodule 510, and an alternative instrument evaluation module 512, inaccordance with an embodiment of the present invention. These modulesreflect some of the tools and features described herein. Their featuresare summarized here and below. Other modules performing similar oradditional useful functions could be added by one skilled in thepertinent art without departing from the spirit and scope of thisinvention.

The price prediction module 506 comprises a collection of the bestavailable price prediction methods for the markets in which the NAVorder management and execution system is operating. The prices predictedmay be for indexes, individual securities or even relativelynon-transparent fund portfolios based on such variable inputs as factoranalysis and past behavior relative to other market measures andportfolios, among others. The price prediction information provided maybe expressed in terms of a specific price or in terms of a probabilityor weighted average forecast with information on reliability andvariability around a point estimate.

The volatility and market risk measurement module 508 analyzes andprovides input based on analysis of recent and current measurements ofvolatility and monitors a variety of indicators that are expected toprovide useful volatility and risk measurement information to theexecution processor 504.

The alternative market evaluation module 510 examines, among otherthings, the relative attractiveness, for a variety of order types, ofthe intraday market for an NAV-based Instrument versus the NAV-basedmarket for that NAV Instrument where orders are entered and executedcontingent upon the calculation of the end-of-day or some other netasset value for the NAV Instrument. In its market evaluation, the moduleexamines bids, offers, depth and location of bids and offers relative tothe intraday NAV proxy and relative to the end-of-day net asset value,looking at features such as those illustrated in FIGS. 3A and 3B anddescribed in the related text.

The alternative instrument evaluation module 512 provides informationfor situations in which an investor is willing to purchase, sell, orsell short any one of two or more NAV Instruments based on a variety ofconsiderations, including expected transaction costs. To illustrate theuse of the alternative instrument evaluation module 512, an investorinterested in investing in small cap stocks might be willing to hold anNAV Instrument based on either the Russell 2000 Index or the S&P 600Index, depending upon their relative attractiveness, the expectedtrading cost associated with taking either of the two positions and theexpected holding period of the position. The alternative instrumentevaluation model 512 would look at some of the same information used bythe alternative market evaluation model 510 plus differences highlightedby the price prediction model 506 and the volatility and market riskmeasurement module 508. Once the intelligent trading algorithm executionprocessor 504 has analyzed and evaluated the data available to it, thesystem enters electronic orders to execution venues such as ECNs,exchanges and other electronic trade entry locations 514. Reports andtrade executions and order status information will be returned to theintelligent trading algorithmic execution process 504 for furtherevaluation and consideration.

In some instances feedback will be sent to the peripheral modules 506,508, 510, and 512 for further evaluation. It should be apparent fromthis description that FIG. 5 illustrates the system and is not intendedto limit the scope of the invention. FIG. 5 should not be interpreted asa definitive description of all relevant possibilities.

The Price Prediction Module 506 incorporates models for probabilisticrange predictions of prices for financial instruments and portfolios offinancial instruments over an interval until a specified net asset valuecalculation is made. The probabilistic range estimates include estimatesof bid-asked spreads in conventional and net asset value based markets.

The Volatility and Market Risk Measurement Module 508 monitors andforecasts volatilities in the form of probability-weighted ranges forprices and bid-asked spreads, including bid-asked spreads affecting theexecution of market on close orders. The Volatility and Market RiskMeasurement Module 508 indicates the expected cost and value of hedgesin intraday or net asset value based markets, reflect a user'spreferences for intraday or end of day pricing and provide estimates ofthe costs of execution immediacy relative to opportunity costs.

Based on revealed user preferences for immediacy and intraday vs. netasset value based executions, the Alternative Market Valuation Module510 evaluates relative spreads and depths of bids and offers inavailable markets to determine the contemporary relative attractivenessof available markets to a specific user. An important ongoingcalculation relates the location of intraday market bids and offersrelative to an NAV proxy and to end of day spreads in the NAV basedmarket. The result of the Alternative Market Valuation Module's 510evaluation of available markets will be routing an order to one or moreconventional markets, routing of the order to one or more NAV-basedmarkets, or direction of the order to two or more eligible markets.

The Alternative Instrument Valuation Module 512 reflects a user'spreferences between or among competing instruments or combinations ofinstruments for which net asset values are periodically calculated andmay be used when there are significant differences in efficiency betweenintraday and net asset value based markets. When such conditionsprevail, this module provides information on the relative attractivenessof using one or more other instruments in lieu of the instrument thatotherwise best fits the user's investment criteria. The AlternativeInstrument Valuation Module 512 evaluates possible choices relative toexpected tracking to the best fit choice and to differences in expectedtransaction and carry costs. This module will be used primarily forevaluation of a best fit instrument relative to other instruments andmarkets to develop a trading response to competitive valuations andmarket opportunities.

FIG. 6 further illustrates exemplary applications of the system as itmight be used by a financial intermediary such as a broker-dealer, abank or a market maker that deals directly with a customer by whom anorder is entered or with an agent of that customer who transmits thecustomer's order to the intermediary. In contrast to system 500illustrated in FIG. 5, which stresses the analytical and evaluationprocess, system 600 shows the order 602 received by the financialintermediary and passed through the transmission authorization process604 which encompasses modules 502, 504 and elements of other modulesshown in FIG. 5 and described above, in accordance with an embodiment ofthe present invention. In module 604 the order is either cancelledbecause it cannot be executed under its stated terms 606 or sent formarket selection and allocation 608 where it is routed to eitherconventional secondary market(s) 610 or net asset value based secondarymarket(s) 612.

FIG. 7 further illustrates the operation of the system modules 700 thattranslate an order expressed in a traditional language into instructionsexpressed in computer language, in accordance with an embodiment of thepresent invention. The traditional language instructions 702 aretranslated into computer language by a specialized computer module 704.The resulting computerized instructions are created 706, and theresulting orders are routed to either conventional secondary market(s)708 or net asset value based secondary market(s) 710.

FIG. 8 further illustrates exemplary applications of the system,emphasizing some of the order management parameters evaluated as part ofoperation of the modules described more fully in connection with thediscussion of FIG. 5, in accordance with an embodiment of the presentinvention. In contrast to system 500 illustrated in FIG. 5, whichstresses the analytical and evaluation process, system 800 emphasizessome examples of the order management parameters 802 that are receivedor evaluated in the order transmission authorization process 604 anddescribed above. In order management calculation module 804 the ordermanagement parameters are evaluated in the context of available marketdata 806 before routing to either conventional secondary market(s) 808or net asset value based secondary market(s) 810.

FIG. 9 emphasizes exemplary applications of the system from theperspective of its use by a market maker trading instruments for which anet asset value is periodically calculated, in accordance with anembodiment of the present invention. As represented in FIG. 9, system900 illustrates the interaction of an embodiment of the presentinvention with existing market maker operations, with particularemphasis on traditional ETF market making support systems 902 andconventional ETF market maker books 904. It is clear to one skilled inthe relevant arts, from the present specification and from the patentspecifications from which it is a continuation, that the ETF marketmaker's role and the operation of an ETF market-making book aredifferent in a number of ways from market making in, for example, acommon stock. Exemplary differences in market making stem from the factsthat (1) an ETF is a derivative instrument that gets its underlyingvalue from a portfolio that is priced in a market that usually operatescontemporaneously with the market in which the ETF shares are traded and(2) the market maker's inventory can be adjusted not only by trading theETF shares but by creating and redeeming ETF shares.

With the introduction of a new market where the ETF is traded at orrelative to its net asset value, additional changes in the marketmaker's risk management process are necessary. These changes arerepresented in the intermarket risk control module 906 that incorporatesmany of the invention's features used by market makers and described indetail in the discussion of FIG. 5. The intermarket risk control module906 interacts with the analytical modules 910 described in more detailin the discussion of modules 506, 508, 510, and 512 in connection withFIG. 5 above. Another module analyzes available market fee and rebateschedules 912. These schedules may affect where and when a market makerchooses to enter a bid or offer because small per lot fee and rebatedifferences can be an important profit determinant in a high volumemarket making operation. The market quality comparison module 914analyses market data from the market maker's perspective to aid in theselection of trading venues that attract orders and order patterns thatoffer profit opportunities that the market maker can take. Thealternative NAV instrument inventory management module 916 is linked tothe alternate instrument evaluation module 512 and controls theselection and management of correlated instrument positions that canoffer attractive risk management alternatives that a market maker canuse more effectively than most other market participants.

As implied by prior references to multiple NAV-based markets, somespecial situations that arise from net asset value based trading willaffect order handling choices. For example, NAV based trading in aspecific financial instrument for which a net asset value is calculatedwill often be available simultaneously relative to two different netasset value calculations. In conventional markets for financialinstruments, buy and sell orders interact only with other orders to buyand sell the same instrument under standard (identical) terms forpricing and settlement. In an embodiment of the present invention, theremay be trading in a financial instrument for which a net asset value iscalculated in a conventional market and trading in the same instrumentat or relative to two or more contingent net asset value calculations atthe same time. To illustrate, with respect to transactions involvingshares of exchange traded funds holding securities traded principally inmarkets that operate outside U.S. trading hours, one function of a netasset value based market will be to reduce the risk of trading with acounterparty that has better information than you have. One way toreduce counterparty knowledge risk is to trade at or relative to a netasset value to be calculated after the securities in the portfolio havetraded for a full trading session in their principal market. In theevent that currency, commodity or conflict news has an outsized impacton the value of a country's securities during hours that the country'shome markets are not open for trading, a sensible approach for manyinvestors who lack special skills or comprehensive knowledge of thesemarkets will be to accept the result of the price discovery mechanism inthe home market and trade the exchange traded fund's shares relative tothe next day's net asset value—after the primary market has traded theshares for a day.

Another case when a later day's net asset value might be a better choiceis after full function actively managed exchange traded funds areintroduced. These funds will have an earlier cut off time for creationand redemption transactions than the 4:00 p.m. close—the time when theprices used for the current day's net asset value calculation will bedetermined. A creation or redemption order entered after the cut offtime might be priced at the following day's net asset value. After thedaily creation/redemption cut off time, market makers are likely towiden the spread between their bids and offers in the net asset valuebased market for the current day. The spread for NAV based trades aroundthe following day's net asset value should still be very tight.Investors and market makers using these markets will approach trading inthese markets differently after the creation/redemption cut off time.

The ability to trade fund shares at or relative to one net asset value,let alone two or more net asset value calculations has not beenencountered in secondary financial markets to date. A variety ofresponses to the range of choices might be deemed appropriate bydifferent market participants under different circumstances. Possibledecision rules include:

Trade in the net asset value based market with the shortest timeremaining before the contingent net asset value based calculation willbe made;

Trade in the net asset value based market with the longest timeremaining before the contingent net asset value based calculation willbe made;

Trade in the net asset value based market with the tightest bid-askspread; and

Use an algorithm that incorporates or evaluates information about thecauses of differences in probable price levels and posted spreads in twoor more net asset value based markets to choose the appropriate netasset value calculation as the basis for a transaction.

The last two choices are preferred embodiments of the present invention.

Similar instruments for which net asset values are periodicallycalculated are acceptable alternatives for some investors. An example ofthis situation might be two or more exchange traded funds tracking thesame or very similar indexes. In an embodiment of the present invention,investors and market makers may trade in any of a number of exchangetraded funds (or other exchange traded NAV Instruments) tracking thesame or very similar indexes or portfolios with the traders' bids andoffers for each instrument dependent on the expense ratio of an exchangetraded fund (or exchange traded note), the size and sign (positive ornegative) of the tracking error of the fund relative to the index, therelative performance of two different indexes, the bid-asked spreads inthe conventional and net asset value markets for similar instruments andother features of the respective instruments and the markets for eachinstrument. Some approaches to this situation are suggested in thediscussion of the alternative instrument valuation module above.

Use of dark pools, cloaked orders and replenishing limit orders willgrow when one or more net asset value markets are available. Somesecurities markets permit and even facilitate fully or partially cloaked(hidden) orders, including orders held in so-called “dark pools” withvarious restrictions on access to information about these orders. Inembodiments of the present invention, when a transaction occurs or whena low latency limit order is detected, an adjustment may be made in thesize or price of a bid or offer in a dark pool or an execution against alimit order may result in replenishment of the shares traded or someother change in the terms of the order. While the presence of orders forexecution in multiple markets complicates trading relative toconventional trading in a single market for a financial instrument, themethods used to accommodate and manage a greater range of related ordersneed not be conspicuously different from the management of such ordersin the conventional market(s) for financial instruments alreadyoperating today. In contrast to the need for new methods to managemultiple net asset value based markets and choices between and amongsimilar net asset value instruments, managing uncommon order types indark pools or elsewhere is usually not different from what investorsencounter in conventional markets today.

VI. EXEMPLARY COMPUTER SYSTEMS

FIG. 10 is a diagram of an exemplary computer system 1000 upon whichembodiments of the present invention (or components thereof) may beimplemented. The exemplary computer system 1000 includes one or moreprocessors, such as processor 1002. The processor 1002 is connected to acommunication infrastructure 1006, such as a bus or network. Varioussoftware implementations are described in terms of this exemplarycomputer system. After reading this description, it will become apparentto a person skilled in the relevant art how to implement the inventionusing other computer systems and/or computer architectures.

Computer system 1000 also includes a main memory 1008, preferably randomaccess memory (RAM), and may include a secondary memory 1010. Thesecondary memory 1010 may include, for example, a hard disk drive 1012and/or a removable storage drive 1014, representing a magnetic tapedrive, an optical disk drive, etc. The removable storage drive 1014reads from and/or writes to a removable storage unit 1018 in awell-known manner. Removable storage unit 1018 represents a magnetictape, optical disk, or other storage medium that is read by and writtento by removable storage drive 1014. As will be appreciated, theremovable storage unit 1018 can include a computer usable storage mediumhaving stored therein computer software and/or data.

In alternative implementations, secondary memory 1010 may include othermeans for allowing computer programs or other instructions to be loadedinto computer system 1000. Such means may include, for example, aremovable storage unit 1022 and an interface 1020. An example of suchmeans may include a removable memory chip (such as an EPROM, or PROM)and associated socket, or other removable storage units 1022 andinterfaces 1020, such as a memory stick or memory card, which allowsoftware and data to be transferred from the removable storage unit 1022to computer system 1000.

Computer system 1000 may also include one or more communicationsinterfaces, such as communications interface 1024. Communicationsinterface 1024 allows software and data to be transferred betweencomputer system 1000 and external devices. Examples of communicationsinterface 1024 may include a modem, a network interface (such as anEthernet card), a communications port, a WIFI interface, a Bluetoothinterface, a cellular interface, a PCMCIA slot and card, etc. Softwareand data transferred via communications interface 1024 are in the formof signals 1028, which may be electronic, electromagnetic, optical orother signals capable of being received by communications interface1024. These signals 1028 are provided to communications interface 1024via a communications path (i.e., channel) 1026. This channel 1026carries signals 1028 and may be implemented using wire or cable, fiberoptics, a wireless link and other communications channels. In anembodiment of the invention, signals 1028 comprise carrier wavesmodulated with control logic.

Any apparatus or manufacture comprising a computer useable or readablemedium having control logic (software) stored therein is referred toherein as a computer program product or program storage device. Thisincludes, but is not limited to, the computer 1000, the main memory1008, the hard disk 1012, the removable storage units 1018, 1022 and thecarrier waves modulated with control logic 1028. Such computer programproducts, having control logic stored therein that, when executed by oneor more data processing devices, cause such data processing devices tooperate as described herein, represent embodiments of the invention.

IV. CONCLUSION

Embodiments of the present invention are directed to the introduction ofmethods, systems, and computer-program products to provide riskinformation, cost estimation and decision-making tools to traders inexchange-traded fund shares.

According to various embodiments of the disclosed processes,supplemental information is developed, calculated, and published tosupport a choice of trading platforms and methods for exchange-tradedfunds, especially funds that are not actively traded or have portfoliosthat are not totally transparent. The trading process preserves fundportfolio confidentiality while permitting market makers and othertraders in these non-transparent exchange-traded funds to estimatetrading costs and risks and manage ETF trading more effectively.

While various embodiments of the present invention have been describedabove, it should be understood that they have been presented by way ofexample only, and not limitation. It will be apparent to persons skilledin the relevant art that various changes in form and detail can be madetherein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.Thus, the breadth and scope of the present invention should not belimited by any of the above-described exemplary embodiments, but shouldbe defined only in accordance with the following claims and theirequivalents.

It is to be appreciated that the Detailed Description section, and notthe Summary and Abstract sections, is intended to be used to interpretthe claims. The Summary and Abstract sections can set forth one or more,but not all exemplary embodiments of the present invention ascontemplated by the inventor(s), and thus, are not intended to limit thepresent invention and the appended claims in any way.

1. A method of order management and execution for trading an exchangelisted financial instrument for which a net asset value is periodicallycalculated, comprising: (a) receiving, with an order receipt computer,an order to trade an exchange listed financial instrument for which anet asset value is periodically calculated, said order authorizing atleast one of a specified party and computerized algorithm to transmitthe order for execution; (b) accessing, with a market selectioncomputer, at least one conventional secondary market and at least onenet asset value based secondary market; (c) evaluating, with the marketselection computer, the at least one conventional secondary and the atleast one net asset value based secondary market, and selecting at leastone of the evaluated markets; (d) determining, with a market and orderevaluation computer, whether to authorize the transmission of the orderfor execution in whole, in part, or not all; (e) selecting, with anorder type selection computer, at least one order type from the ordertypes authorized by said order and offered by a selected market; (f)authorizing, with an order entry computer, at least one entry of all ofthe order, entry of part of the order, and cancellation of all or partof the order; and (g) with an instruction computer, at least one of:receiving or delivering instructions for trading said financialinstrument wherein the instructions are stated in one or more spoken orwritten languages or simplified elements from such languages;translating trading instructions into computer executable orders; andentering said computer executable orders into said at least one selectedmarket for execution.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said receiving(a) further comprises receiving, with the order receipt computer, theorder in the form of an order to buy or sell at least one of whole andfractional units of at least one of: a specified exchange listedfinancial instrument for which a net asset value is periodicallycalculated, a combination of specified exchange listed financialinstruments for which a net asset value is periodically calculated, anda combination of a specified exchange listed financial instrument forwhich a net asset value is periodically calculated and other financialinstruments.
 3. The method of claim 1 further comprising: formattingsaid order, with a formatting computer, to include at least one of: adescription of how the order should be routed to at least one selectedmarket, a description of any price limits or other conditions orcontingencies imposed on execution, and a provision giving an agentmanaging the order discretion to at least one of (i) route the order toone or more selected markets using available or subsequently obtained ordeveloped information and (ii) cancel the order.
 4. The method of claim1, wherein said determining and selecting (d) and (e) further comprise:determining or selecting at least one market and one order type used inthat market by optimizing for at least one factor or criterion from aset of factors or criteria comprising at least one of: reducing at leastone of expected transaction costs, including any net market fees, andthe variability of transaction costs, concentrating orders to capturerebates, comprising at least one of rebates of exchange fees and rebatesof market data revenue, making cross market comparisons of relationshipsbetween and among variables comprising bids, offers, fee and rebatestructures, net asset values and net asset value proxy calculations,trading volumes and bid and offer sizes, consulting a database of atleast one of volatility and trading cost experiences in availablemarkets with available order types, and finding greater liquidity bytrading in multiple markets.
 5. The method of claim 1, furthercomprising: using one or more analytical computer to process informationaccumulated and organized to provide at least one of: absolute orrelative price predictions for financial instruments, measurement orprediction of price volatility, selection of markets for tradeexecution, and comparative evaluation and selection from among two ormore financial instruments with correlated return behavior.
 6. Themethod of claim 1 further comprising at least one of: developing bidsand offers in said instrument, in one or more conventional markets andin one or more net asset value based markets, such markets operatingcontemporaneously; selectively executing trades in said instrument, inone or more of said conventional and said net asset value markets; andat least one of (i) paying or receiving a financial incentive for one ormore varieties of executed resting orders and (ii) paying or receivingfees or other costs to execute a trade against resting orders.
 7. Themethod of claim 1, further comprising using a net asset value basedmarket computer to generate a net asset value based secondary marketplatform configured to enable contemporaneous trading at, or relativeto, at least two different net asset value calculations, where each ofsaid calculations is made from at least one of bids, offers, and pricesof underlying financial instruments measured at different specifiedtimes.
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein said determining and selecting(d) and (e) further comprise comparing bids and offers contemporaneouslyavailable in multiple markets and using different order types.
 9. Themethod of claim 8, further comprising: transmitting the order to one ormore selected markets to obtain best execution based on an evaluation ofat least one of: bid price; bid size; offer price; offer size;relationships among bids, offers, net asset value proxies and net assetvalues available, calculated or to be calculated from at least one ofbids, offers and recently executed trades in portfolio components orbenchmarks for said exchange-listed financial instrument; and structuralfeatures of the markets.
 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising:transmitting the order to one or more selected markets to obtain bestexecution measured by an expected or specified difference between aprojected execution price and at least one of: a net asset value proxy;a net asset value to be calculated by, or on behalf of, an issuer of thefinancial instrument; another net asset value calculation appropriatefor such comparisons in at least one of the markets; and another priceor value calculation.
 11. The method of claim 1, further comprising:hedging systematic or beta risks and risks of timing differences betweenconventional and net asset value based executions using correlatedinstruments.
 12. An order management and execution system for trading anexchange listed financial instrument for which a net asset value isperiodically calculated, comprising: an order receipt computerconfigured to receive an order to trade an exchange listed financialinstrument for which a net asset value is periodically evaluated, saidorder authorizing at least one of a specified party and a computerizedalgorithm to transmit the order for execution; a market selectioncomputer configured to access at least one conventional secondary marketand at least one net asset value based secondary market; the marketselection computer configured to evaluate the at least one conventionalsecondary market and the at least one net asset value based secondarymarket, and to select at least of the evaluated markets; a market andorder evaluation computer configured to determine whether to authorizethe transmission of the order for execution in whole, in part, or not atall; an order type selection computer configured to select at least oneorder type from the order types authorized by said order and offered bya selected market; an order type selection computer configured toauthorize at least one of entry of all of the order, entry of part ofthe order, and cancellation of all or part of the order; and aninstruction computer configured to at least one of: receive or deliverinstructions for trading said financial instrument wherein theinstructions are stated in one or more spoken or written languages orsimplified elements from such languages; translate trading instructionsinto computer executable orders; and enter said computer executableorders into said at least one selected market for execution.
 13. Thesystem of claim 12, wherein said order receipt computer is furtherconfigured to receive the order in the form of an order to buy or sellat least one of whole and fractional units of at least one of: aspecified exchange listed financial instrument for which a net assetvalue is periodically calculated; a combination of specified exchangelisted financial instruments for which a net asset value is periodicallycalculated; and a combination of a specified exchange listed financialinstrument for which a net asset value is periodically calculated andother financial instruments.
 14. The system of claim 12 furthercomprising a formatting computer configured to format said order toinclude at least one of: a description of how the order should be routedto at least one selected market; a description of any price limits orother conditions or contingencies imposed on execution; and a provisiongiving an agent managing the order discretion to at least one of (i)route the order to one or more selected markets using available orsubsequently obtained or developed information and (ii) cancel theorder.
 15. The system of claim 12, wherein said market selection andsaid order type selection computer are configured to: select at leastone market and one order type used in that market by optimizing for atleast one factor or criterion from a set of factors or criteriacomprising at least one of: reducing at least one of expectedtransaction costs, including any net market fees, and the variability oftransaction costs; concentrating orders to capture rebates, comprisingat least one of rebates of exchange fees and rebates of market datarevenue; making cross market comparisons of relationships between andamong variables comprising bids, offers, fee and rebate structures, netasset values and net asset value proxy calculations, trading volumes andbid and offer sizes; consulting a database of at least one of volatilityand trading cost experiences in available markets with available ordertypes; and finding greater liquidity by trading in multiple markets. 16.The system of claim 12, further comprising one or more analyticalcomputer configured to process information accumulated and organized toprovide at least one of: absolute or relative price predictions forfinancial instruments; measurement or prediction of price volatility;selection of markets for trade execution; and comparative evaluation andselection from among two or more financial instruments with correlatedreturn behavior.
 17. The system of claim 12 being further configured toat least one of: develop bids and offers in said instrument, in one ormore conventional markets and in one or more net asset value basedmarkets, such markets operating contemporaneously; selectively executetrades in said instrument, in one or more of said conventional and saidnet asset value markets; and at least one of (i) pay or receive afinancial incentive for one or more varieties of executed resting ordersand (ii) pay or receive fees or other costs to execute a trade againstresting orders.
 18. The system of claim 12, further comprising a netasset value based market computer configured to generate a net assetvalue based secondary market platform configured to enablecontemporaneous trading at, or relative to, at least two different netasset value calculations, where each of said calculations is made fromat least one of bids, offers, and prices of underlying financialinstruments measured at different specified times.
 19. The system ofclaim 12, wherein said market selection and order type computer areconfigured to compare bids and offers contemporaneously available inmultiple markets and using different order types.
 20. The system ofclaim 19, being further configured to: transmit the order to one or moreselected markets to obtain best execution based on an evaluation of atleast one of: bid price; bid size; offer price; offer size;relationships among bids, offers, net asset value proxies and net assetvalues available, calculated or to be calculated from at least one ofbids, offers and recently executed trades in portfolio components orbenchmarks for said exchange-listed financial instrument; and structuralfeatures of the markets.
 21. The system of claim 12, being furtherconfigured to: transmit the order to one or more selected markets toobtain best execution measured by an expected or specified differencebetween a projected execution price and at least one of: a net assetvalue proxy; a net asset value to be calculated by, or on behalf of, anissuer of the financial instrument; another net asset value calculationappropriate for such comparisons in at least one of the markets; andanother price or value calculation.
 22. The system of claim 12, beingfurther configured to: hedge systematic or beta risks and risks oftiming differences between conventional and net asset value basedexecutions using correlated instruments.
 23. An article of manufacturefor order management and execution of trading in an exchange listedfinancial instrument for which a net asset value is periodicallycalculated, said article of manufacture comprising a non-transitorycomputer usable medium having a computer readable program code embodiedtherein, for: (a) receiving, with an order receipt computer, an order totrade an exchange listed financial instrument for which a net assetvalue is periodically calculated, said order authorizing at least one aspecified party and a computerized algorithm to transmit the order forexecution; (b) accessing, with a market selection computer, at least oneconventional secondary market and at least one net asset value basedsecondary market; (c) evaluating, with the market selection computer,the at least one conventional secondary market and the at least one netasset value based secondary market, and selecting at least one of theevaluated markets; (d) determining, with a market order and orderevaluation computer, whether to authorize the transmission of the orderfor execution in whole, in part, or not at all; (e) selecting, with anorder type selection computer, at least one order type from the ordertypes authorized by said order and offered by a selected market; (f)authorizing, with an order entry computer, at least one of entry of allof the order, entry of part of the order, and cancellation of all orpart of the order; and (g) with an instruction computer, at least oneof: receiving or delivering instructions for trading said financialinstrument wherein the instructions are stated in one or more spoken orwritten languages or simplified elements from such languages;translating trading instructions into computer executable orders; andentering said computer executable orders into said at least one selectedmarket for execution.
 24. The article of manufacture of claim 23,wherein said computer readable program code for receiving (a) furthercomprises computer readable program code for receiving the order in theform of an order to buy or sell at least one of whole and fractionalunits of at least one of: a specified exchange listed financialinstrument for which a net asset value is periodically calculated; acombination of specified exchange listed financial instruments for whicha net asset value is periodically calculated; and a combination of aspecified exchange listed financial instrument for which a net assetvalue is periodically calculated and other financial instruments. 25.The article of manufacture of claim 23 further comprising computerreadable program code for: formatting said order to include at least oneof: a description of how the order should be routed to at least oneselected market; a description of any price limits or other conditionsor contingencies imposed on execution; and a provision giving an agentmanaging the order discretion to at least one of (i) route the order toone or more selected markets using available or subsequently obtained ordeveloped information and (ii) cancel the order.
 26. The article ofmanufacture of claim 23, wherein said computer readable program code fordetermining and selecting (d) and (e) further comprises computerreadable program code for: determining or selecting at least one marketand one order type used in that market by optimizing for at least onefactor or criterion from a set of factors or criteria comprising atleast one of: reducing at least one of expected transaction costs,including any net market fees, and the variability of transaction costs;concentrating orders to capture rebates, comprising at least one ofrebates of exchange fees and rebates of market data revenue; makingcross market comparisons of relationships between and among variablescomprising bids, offers, fee and rebate structures, net asset values andnet asset value proxy calculations, trading volumes and bid and offersizes; consulting a database of at least one of volatility and tradingcost experiences in available markets with available order types; andfinding greater liquidity by trading in multiple markets.
 27. Thearticle of manufacture of claim 23, further comprising computer readableprogram code for: processing information accumulated and organized toprovide at least one of: absolute or relative price predictions forfinancial instruments; measurement or prediction of price volatility;selection of markets for trade execution; and comparative evaluation andselection from among two or more financial instruments with correlatedreturn behavior.
 28. The article of manufacture of claim 23 furthercomprising computer readable program code for at least one of:developing bids and offers in said instrument, in one or moreconventional markets and in one or more net asset value based markets,such markets operating contemporaneously; selectively executing tradesin said instrument, in one or more of said conventional and said netasset value markets; and at least one of (i) paying or receiving afinancial incentive for one or more varieties of executed resting ordersand (ii) paying or receiving fees or other costs to execute a tradeagainst resting orders.
 29. The article of manufacture of claim 23,further comprising computer readable program code for generating a netasset value based secondary market platform configured to enablecontemporaneous trading at, or relative to, at least two different netasset value calculations, where each of said calculations is made fromat least one of bids, offers, and prices of underlying financialinstruments measured at different specified times.
 30. The article ofmanufacture of claim 23, wherein said computer readable program code fordetermining and selecting (d) and (e) further comprises computerreadable program code for comparing bids and offers contemporaneouslyavailable in multiple markets and using different order types.
 31. Thearticle of manufacture of claim 30, further comprising computer readableprogram code for: transmitting the order to one or more selected marketsto obtain best execution based on an evaluation of at least one of: bidprice; bid size; offer price; offer size; relationships among bids,offers, net asset value proxies and net asset values available,calculated or to be calculated from at least one of bids, offers andrecently executed trades in portfolio components or benchmarks for saidexchange-listed financial instrument; and structural features of themarkets.
 32. The article of manufacture of claim 23, further comprisingcomputer readable program code for: transmitting the order to one ormore selected markets to obtain best execution measured by an expectedor specified difference between a projected execution price and at leastone of: a net asset value proxy; a net asset value to be calculated by,or on behalf of, an issuer of the financial instrument; another netasset value calculation appropriate for such comparisons in at least oneof the markets; and another price or value calculation.
 33. The articleof manufacture of claim 23, further comprising computer readable programcode for: hedging systematic or beta risks and risks of timingdifferences between conventional and net asset value based executionsusing correlated instruments.